S.T.A.G.E. said:
Staude said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Staude said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
badgenome said:
PSnPANEK_KLS said:
Fuck Gays Of War 2_ Resistance 2 FTW!!!!!!!! 30vs30 Player online Resistance 2 vs 6vs6 Gays Of War 2____ PLZ ur retarted if u cant c which game offers more & hass amped it ^ more .. ding ding ding.. Resistance 2 my loyal PS3 Fanboys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, & Fuck A Beta Bitch
PSN: PANEK_KLS |
Well said.
|
I thought you were better than that. You're agreeing with Jibbrish? Gears isn't going to have 30 vs 30 multiplayer for a reason. It's a clusterfuck in 3rd person. Also, on Resistance that great huge 30 vs 30 multiplayer is all squadbased, because even they admitted it would be a clusterfuck as well. Gears is better with small doses of people anyway.
|
C&C renegade disagrees with you :p i'll probably get flamed for that, but i've played on servers with 100 people that was decent and still lots of fun. Even though the maps aren't that big.
|
How big was the map? I've played PC games with 100 people on the map as well.
|
Not very big. Pc games or console games make no difference. It's the way the gameplay functions that does. For instance cod4 is hectic and chaotic no matter what machine you play it on.
|
Thats BS and you know it. Have you ever played CS or Battlefield?
|
Yes i have, and i know it's not bs.
Gameplay is what determains how your game plays, and so it's a deciding factor on how everything in the game works.
Imagine playing CS on Battlefield sized maps ?
Imagine playing Battlefield on CS sized maps ?
Looks really boring doesn't it ? That's because their gameplay is made for their maps, and with their playerlimit. Now it is such that Resistance 2 was made for 60 player, and with the scores it's getting it must have managed to do it right, so don't even for a second say that it's not about gameplay. What machine it's on is irrelevent for the gameplay (well obviously more power is better, but the cell handles that)
